# FILE NAME: 00001000.soc
# TITLE: Should doctors be allowed to prescribe heroin to addicts? [0020843a6955cbc00ec2922b1730c5aa]
# DESCRIPTION: 
# DATA TYPE: soc
# MODIFICATION TYPE: original
# RELATES TO: 
# RELATED FILES: 
# PUBLICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# MODIFICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# NUMBER ALTERNATIVES: 4
# NUMBER VOTERS: 5
# NUMBER UNIQUE ORDERS: 5
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 1: Statement 1 - The initial draft consensus statement presented an interesting distinction which I think is important to consider. The problem with street drugs, in general, is the level of desperation in addicts and the violent behaviour they commit when this happens. The problem is therefore not necessarily with the drug itself, but with the people and situation it is in. Methadone is an effective treatment and this should be encouraged, however, it is an opioid and is therefore extremely addictive. Many argue that opioid addiction is worse than heroin addiction and therefore not a viable alternative. If addicts are desperate, it is possible that even if prescribed heroin by a doctor they would still be vulnerable to seeking it on the streets as well. In a controlled environment such as the one in Switzerland, the patients would have their heroin dosage prescribed and controlled by doctors so they would have no need to turn to the streets, which makes this a viable solution. If it was deemed that the patient could not function in society then they would also be provided with housing so they would be protected and no longer have to commit violent crimes on the streets to fund their habits. This method has been seen to be very effective, though its cost to society is much higher.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 2: Statement 2 - There should be a distinction between drug addicts who are willing to change and drug addicts who are not willing to change. If the addict is not willing to change, then doctors should not prescribe heroin. However, if the addict is willing to change, then the doctor should be allowed to prescribe heroin, but only in a controlled environment and only if there is clear evidence that the addict is willing to change and this is assessed and agreed by doctors in a thorough process.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 3: Statement 3 - There should be a distinction between drug addicts who are willing to change and drug addicts who are not willing to change. If the addict is not willing to change, then doctors should not prescribe heroin. However, if the addict is willing to change, then the doctor should be allowed to prescribe heroin to them, but only in a controlled environment. This is because heroin can help wean addicts off heroin if the addict is prepared to change. This has worked well in other countries such as Portugal, where heroin prescribing was used to combat a rise in drug-related crime. In these countries, medical prescribed heroin reduced crime, therefore this should be done in Australia too.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 4: Statement 4 - We agree that the 'willing to change' argument is flawed as addicts may not be sincere in their promise. However, addicts should be able to choose between being rehabilitated (i.e. 'cold turkey' detoxification) and being maintained with methadone (in a dose-by-dose supervised situation). If they wish to be maintained with heroin, this should only be in a similar dose-by-dose supervised situation. If an addict repeatedly 'disappears' and can't be found then this should be treated as a relapse. In this case the patient should go back to rehabilitation, or back to methadone maintenance, with the chance to move back to heroin maintenance at a later stage.
1: 1,3,2,4
1: 4,3,1,2
1: 3,4,2,1
1: 1,4,3,2
1: 3,2,4,1